Is Global Warming Real

Night Sky

Well-known member
Mundane + Horary

To me the evidence is circumstancial. I haven't made up my mind on this subject and don't intend to until I'm knee deep at least in water and then some.

The media have only taken up this issue in the last five years. If you go back only a few years, you find that the Media ignored the idea as ludicrous. And laughed at people for proposing it.:38: They changed their minds in the snap of a finger... how come? Nothing changed. What is their motivation?

Scientists who depend on their research funds for liveliehoods may not be unbiased, setting up experiments to prove themselves right, and get more "research funds" The global mean temperature is a difficult thing to measure.

Politicians are a fickle bunch, their thinking span is about five years, ten if they seriously consider a second term. + They are not to be trusted.



I asked the question... I used to believe in it when it wasn't mainstream. But now that the media JUMP to CONCLUSIONS every time it's warm in the UK in Summer, which it can be sometimes. Sunny in summer? Definitely global warming!!!

Here is my chart:

747648a6595ad3bd8.gif



I didn't think it would give me anything. But it is interesting for several reasons.

ARGUMENT FOR

EARTH. There are a lot of Earth planets, in fire houses: Taurus rules the Ascendant, Taurus is as Earth as you can get.

Follow the trail, you get Venus, conjunct Earth rulers Mercury (ruler of Virgo) and Saturn (ruler of Capricorn) in VIRGO, ( a changing earth sign) in the Fifth house...( house traditionally Solar and of Heat.)

The Jupiter in Capricorn in 9th (house of foreign countries) bringing 8th house to them (transformation of Earth).

4th house is house of what lies beneath our feet. The biggest piece of real estate I can think of is our Planet, and home to all. Ruled by Leo with Sun therein. A heating Earth? Neptune in Aquarius in opposition may signify a polluted (Neptune) Sky (Aquarius)... being heated by the SOLAR opposition. Also Moon here is applying in aspect... Oceans are involved?


ARGUMENT AGAINST

This is more on a political level rather than looking at the Entire Earth, look at people.

Sun opposite Neptune means deception. Moon applies to this Neptune medly also including Chiron and Node. Some people may have created the story for political purposes,(10th house) of which I don't know and don't want to speculate. Some scientists (Aquarius) may have simply got it wrong and been mistaken (Neptune) yet believing themselves to be correct...

I ask if "global warming" is real in terms of the enormous hype surrounding a simple THEORY which has only some circumstantial evidence... and a circus of slapstick followers. If I had to make a decision I would go along with it, but at the same time dispute many of these so called "projections" as nothing more than "projections". Don't count your eggs before they hatch.:D
 
Last edited:

Natasha

Well-known member
Neptune can also part the clouds & clear the fog which it initially can create
in other words the hype created by the media may not be genuine (& designed just to grandiose the media / sell papers etc) but the fundamentals which motivated this issue could be revealed as having foundation.
Its interesting that the Neptune Sun is significant in this horary as we are having a great deal of trouble separating the genuine and the none genuine on this issue.

Your not originally from Oz by any chance as I have noticed that folk from Oz seem to be the most skeptical of global warming

Neptune can also indicate too that the issue we are focusing on is NOT the exact issue of importance but there is a far more urgent issue clouded in the fog hidden by hype and ego (Sun) self-interest of the establishment (media corporates government).

Perhaps the actual global warming itself is not the issue which is endangering the planet but there is lurking in the fog an endangerment to the planet which has perhaps been alluded to but ignored as it is not as dramatic.

To me this chart does speak strongly of mother nature whom we live upon - elevated placement of Moon, most earthy of rising signs.
And Pluto placed in the 8th gives feeling perhaps that the endangerment (or loss of resources) could be an inheritance we give to our childrens children & their children.

Afterall we certianly are splurging the non renewable resources like there is no tommorow and non renewable means they do run out for good (well the next few thousand years anyway).

I also notice the grand trine to the ascendant Saturn & Jupiter. Trines are able to be the most wasteful of all aspects and thats exactly what is going on. Fossil fuel usage in buildings cars etc is literally splurged in a notably percentage of uses. To be all gobbled up now by us and leaving none for the Future inherited by future generations.

Jupiter in the 9th can also be the most sure it is right - justifiying the use of the non renewable resources and not wanting to accept other points of view.
Inteesting there are several planets in the 5th house where we can just want to enjoy ourself (natural ruler is Leo afterall) and think of fun and good times for the now with not much thought for the future.
 
Last edited:

archergirl

Well-known member
Nothing changed. What is their motivation?

Um, a great deal has changed. Hurricane season lasts much longer and the hurricanes are much stronger (Katrina, perhaps?) The ice shelves in the Artic/Antarctic are melting much earlier in the season and not freezing solid for as long, either. Haven't you heard about the polar bears? An entire ice shelf the size of Manhattan broke off the Antarctic a few years back: an unprecedented event. The glaciers, all over the world from the Alps to the Andes, have receded, and receded, and receded. Global warming? I do think so.

People who don't see that things are changing, and rapidly, must have their eyes firmly closed. The documented evidence is everywhere. A more salient question might be whether it is solely human activity that has caused it, or whether it is an entirely natural phenomenon; on this, my feelings are mixed, but the facts of global warming are more or less a given.

AG;)
 
Last edited:

Natasha

Well-known member
archergirl said:
People who don't see that things are changing, and rapidly, must have their eyes firmly closed. The documented evidence is everywhere. A more salient question might be whether it is solely human activity that has caused it, or whether it is an entirely natural phenomenon; on this, my feelings are mixed, but the facts of global warming are more or less a given. AG;)
Our media in Oz are still the global warming deniers as are a siginifiant proportion of Ozzies. Way down here many have their 'heads in the sand'. Its not happening here (apparantly??) so according to us it does not exist. Combine this with the 'she will be allrite mate' mentality of our culture in general and you have the global warming denier culture.

I wonder how this image is represented on the Ozzie chart (I prefer to work with the ozzie chart which has all the Sagitarius). Perhaps its that Sag / Jupiter arrogance which becomes dogmatic in order to stick with its ideology
 
Last edited:

Night Sky

Well-known member
archergirl said:
Um, a great deal has changed. Hurricane season lasts much longer and the hurricanes are much stronger (Katrina, perhaps?) The ice shelves in the Artic/Antarctic are melting much earlier in the season and not freezing solid for as long, either. Haven't you heard about the polar bears? An entire ice shelf the size of Manhattan broke off the Antarctic a few years back: an unprecedented event.

AG;)

These points on there own do not "PROVE" the enormous claims that the scientists and Media are implying. Firstly that sea levels will rise, secondly that the gulf stream will shut down, thirdly that the world is about to be put into a climate chaos of droughts followed by hurricanes.

We KNOW that the climate has always been changing... in the 17th century it was a lot colder than today, the river Thames in London used to freeze over for months every winter, and in the 12th century, there was a much warmer period... even warmer than today. Was there industrial pollution in the late medieval period.... No there wasn't.


What I'm proposing is that it's arrogant to jump to conclusions, when actually I think science has a myopic vision. There have always been hurricanes in Louisiana, it's only a big distaster in the 21st century because previously not many people lived there and previously, if there was a big hurricane there wasn't the live coverage. Part of it is the information that's available to the world via cable and the net. Global warming isn't so much the issue as Globalism... global communication, and science that wants to connect small things up to form a "story" which will never be completely accurate, because they will never have the complete picture.


I am unconvinced by the arguments put forward... "oh look this glacier has melted".... It's just not enough to come to the conclusions that they are coming to. Just because it's become accepted fact doesn't make it fact, they don't have much that's specific... there are many conflicting views on it, not only on the causes, but the consequences. Will I believe it just because most people believe it? Most people don't believe in astrology.:cool:

So tell me what you think of the chart.:)
 

archergirl

Well-known member
The Information Age has indeed come a long way from where it used to be; however, so has science and technology. Even during the protracted mini Warm Age during the Medieval Period, which lasted a couple of hundred years, the glaciers had not melted as far back as they have in the last 50. Ice cores from Antarctica have documented every Ice Age and mini Ice Age for the last 740,000 years; and the changes in the last two centuries, since the advent of the Industrial Age, have been unprecedented. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/11/1110_041110_antarctic_ice_2.html

As to the consequences (rising sea levels, etc) no, we don't know for sure, but technology has come along far enough that there are several probabilities, all of which are reasonable to assume. I do agree that there are warm periods and cool periods; we seem to be in a warm period anyway. The problem is, the impact of industrialisation seems to have warmed it a little too much, a little too quickly.

I agree that the media are catastrophising everything they can think of, but it's not a bad thing, IMO, to get people to wake up to the value of the Earth and her bounty, and to start treating her with a lot more respect and a lot less indifference. In which case, the question should be, "Who cares?". If it makes people use less plastic and polluting fossil fuels, where is the harm?

As for the chart, I don't think much of it because I think the question is off the mark...that's just my own opinion, however. Even you admit that there are warming and cooling periods; therefore, of course 'global warming' exists; it has always existed, and for the first time we are able to document the phenomenon. Another thing to take into consideration is that during past warming and cooling periods where human beings already inhabited the planet, the warming and cooling periods have had a significant impact on human existence and culture. The end of the last Ice Age (a 'global warming' episode) resulted in the Agricultural Revolution: the advent of farming, which changed the face of human culture forever. The last mini Ice Age during the Renaissance caused widespread famine and starvation; the warm periods in between brought wars and plagues. There are 6 billion of us now, so it seems as obvious as the nose on my face that the warming trend, whether human-caused or simply God's work, will have an impact.

Mundane astrology is my worst subject, so I don't feel I'm qualified on that account to make a comment from an astrological viewpoint, anyhow.:)

AG:)
 
Last edited:

Vista

Well-known member
Night Sky said:
These points on there own do not "PROVE" the enormous claims that the scientists and Media are implying. Firstly that sea levels will rise, secondly that the gulf stream will shut down, thirdly that the world is about to be put into a climate chaos of droughts followed by hurricanes.

I would have to agree with you Night Sky about this.



We KNOW that the climate has always been changing... in the 17th century it was a lot colder than today, the river Thames in London used to freeze over for months every winter, and in the 12th century, there was a much warmer period... even warmer than today. Was there industrial pollution in the late medieval period.... No there wasn't.

It's my understanding that the earth temperature has never varied more than 7 degrees, ever.


What I'm proposing is that it's arrogant to jump to conclusions, when actually I think science has a myopic vision. There have always been hurricanes in Louisiana, it's only a big distaster in the 21st century because previously not many people lived there and previously, if there was a big hurricane there wasn't the live coverage. Part of it is the information that's available to the world via cable and the net. Global warming isn't so much the issue as Globalism... global communication, and science that wants to connect small things up to form a "story" which will never be completely accurate, because they will never have the complete picture.

Again I agree. The frenzy of global warming did not reach its peak until Michael Moore came out with his movie and Al Gore wrote his book. The media took if from there and escalated it to unseen proportions. I am not suggesting there is not some truth to it, however, is it really as catastrophic as they are suggesting? I don't think so. I have listened to many radio programs and read scores of articles from scientist who say that the earth’s temperature variation is normal and has been happening for thousands of years. They don't get much media attention,therefore you don't hear about the opposing views. I have to ask you all this, why are scientists who say there is a major global warming problem more valid than the scientists who say there isn't one? :rolleyes:



I am unconvinced by the arguments put forward... "oh look this glacier has melted".... It's just not enough to come to the conclusions that they are coming to. Just because it's become accepted fact doesn't make it fact, they don't have much that's specific... there are many conflicting views on it, not only on the causes, but the consequences. Will I believe it just because most people believe it? Most people don't believe in astrology.:cool:

There seems to be many "one sided" views depicted in the media, in particular in support of unavoidable doom of global warming. It's a money maker is it not? Think of all the companies, including television programs who can jump on the global warming product and program train....What's more, there does seem to be a lot of 10th house activity suggesting to me career, work, and political gain.

So tell me what you think of the chart.:)

Difficult one to predict. Also, if global warming is real, the question might be, "does the warming cycle mean impending disaster?":(
 
Last edited:

astro09

Well-known member
Archergirl,

Good job. I like to add some additional comments. During the modern times, with the dependency in fossil fuels, the amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere have thicken. As the CO2 emissions continue, so the thikenning of the CO2 layer; thus the trapping of heat.

During the Ice Age there was a mile in depth of ice from New York to Canada. It is suggested, by the recording of CO2 present, that the rising of the CO2 levels had increase two degrees. With that, all that ice has dissappeared.

A rise in temperature of seven degrees, as some models would show, will impact far more. Although, seven degree may appear to be an insignificant number for some, in matters of the Earth, that has a disastrous potential; especially in low lands.

The warmer water melting the ice, it does rises the water volumes in the oceans; on top of it, the expansion of the water molecule rises the water levels even more. Hence, the litoral is adversely affected...the water find its way into the land...We will lose more fertile land for agriculture at a time so critical.

In terms of astrology, I really do not follow the mundane branch of it. However, the subject is so sensitive and important to understand that I have gone this far in trying to explain it. I have NOT seen Moore's film...I have followed science.

For those that follow mundane astrology, how do you fit the above in to it?
 

astro09

Well-known member
During the Ice Age there was a mile in depth of ice from New York to Canada. It is suggested, by the recording of CO2 present, that the rising of the CO2 levels had increase two degrees

I meant two degrees regarding the temperature.
 

arcturus

Active member
seems more like a "is this information really true?" kind of question. For some reason the chart does not seem to want to pop up. I dont have lilly next to me but it is under the 3rd house.
 

ElenaJ

Well-known member
Night Sky, the chart doesn't open up on my screen either. Could you maybe post it in a different way, and try again? Or perhaps give me the coordinates so I can generate it?
Interesting though that the majority of replies seem to be discussions of whether or not global warming is valid, but few are reading the chart to interpret it.
In fact twice you have to ask, Well, what do you think about the chart?
In a horary chart there are specific rules to follow for interpretation. "I don't agree with the question" has no validity here, there are specific situations in which a chart is valid or not valid for reading, and none of these include the personal opinions of the reader.
Natasha makes some interesting points about the chart, but not being able to view it makes it difficult for me. However, Neptune opposite Sun shrieks deception as well as confusion, and the 5th full of planets could also represent speculation on a grand scale.
Let's leave politics and pre-conceptions out and concentrate on the chart. We might learn more from it that way.
 
Top